20140520 Late CorrespondenceJANICE HAHN
44TH DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA
. .
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
404 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
SMALL BUSINESS
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
RANKING MEMBER -HEALTH AND TECHNOLOGY
(202)225-8220
PORTS CAUCUS
resz. f t e uttb tate.5
SAN TE:
140 WW. 6TH W.
6TH STRERE ET
FOUNDER AND CO-CHAIR
SAN PEDRO, CA 90731
¢
oot jot epreantatibez
(310)831-1799
CROATIAN CAUCUS
T3 �J 7J b i
COMPTON OFFICE:
CO-CHAIR(s'�JtZTtQI�,
^gyp
�� 20515-0544
205 S. WILLOWBROOK AVENUE
COMPTON, CA 90220
HTTP:UHAHN.HOUSE.GOV
May 20, 2014
(310)605-5520
SOUTH GATE OFFICE•
8650 CALIFORNIA AVENUE
Members of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
SOUTH GATE, CA 90280
(323) 563-9562
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.,
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Dear Councilmembers:
I write in support of the proposed resolution the RPV council will soon consider regarding
prompt and necessary action to preserve the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of Rancho
Palos Verdes related to the butane storage facility operated by Rancho LPG holding. It is
extremely important to the community of Rancho Palos Verdes that we promote an open
discussion of the future of these facilities to keep the public educated. I have long fought for
safety of the citizens you represent as well as the ones I represent in San Pedro, and this
resolution will finally place us on the path to resolving this outstanding issue.
Just over one year ago, I spoke out in support of the EPA's decision to sue the owners of the
Rancho LPG Tanks for their repeated violations of federal law. This process of litigation
continues and I am committed to holding Rancho LPG fully accountable at the federal level.
However, the role of the RPV City Council is crucial to hold Rancho LPG accountable by all
local and state authorities.
Today the Rancho LPG facility is a potential safety hazard, but should we fail to act a hazard can
quickly escalate to a crisis. We have an opportunity and a responsibility to be proactive and
prevent a crisis occurring next to shops, homes, six soccer fields, and an elementary school.
Thank you for taking a stand today for the health of your residents. It is crucial that the Rancho
Palos Verdes City Council take the lead on this issue and approve a plan of action. The public
deserves a safe neighborhood and the right to be a part of the process. Please accept my support
for the resolution to preserve the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens and property owners
of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
Sincerely,
2a o I -PC Takk
Janice Hahn 55,2j>y�l(
Member of Congress
MADE A PARTOFT RECORD AT
4CIL MEETING OF
OFFICE OF THE CITY Ty
CARLA MORREALE, CITY CLERK
CITYOF
,.
RANCHO
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: MAY 20, 2014
SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO
AGENDA**
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented
for tonight's meeting:
Item No. Description of Material
SS2 b Email from Ken DeLong
SS2 d Emails from: Al Sattler; April L. Sandell; Carl Southwell;
Ron Conrow; Justin Vogt with letter from Congresswoman
Janice Hahn
2 Email from Tristan D. Harris with letter from Don Douthwright
4 Emails from: Dena Friedson; Martin Martinez; Letter from
Andrea Vona of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land
Conservancy
Respectfully submitted,
Carla Morreale
** PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted
through Monday, May 19, 2014**.
WAGENDA\2014 Additions Revisions to agendas\20140520 additions revisions to agenda.doc
From: Ken DeLong <ken.delong@verizon.net>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 201411:30 AM
To: CC
Subject: May 20th Council Agenda, Discussion Topics, #B McCormick Ambulance Service
May 20, 2014
To: Mayor Duhovic and City Council Members:
Subject: May 20th Council Agenda, Discussion Topics, #B McCormick Ambulance Service
I have noted Councilwoman' Brooks study session item concerning ambulance service on the Peninsula. While it is
understandable that Councilmembers may be unaware of how emergency services operate, one would expect that the
City Manager and senior staff would be versed in emergency services.
Yesterday I visited Fire Station 106 and confirmed much of what I did know and learned additional processes as well. LA
County Fire is responsible for medical emergencies and a call to "911" is first answered (RPV, RHE, RH) by Lomita Sheriff
who then forwards to LA County Fire who then dispatches Fire personnel including ambulances. LA County Fire contracts
with McCormick Ambulance services on the Peninsula and likely other areas as well. The contract between LA County
Fire and McCormick Ambulance includes response times, number of ambulances in the area etc. I was informed that at
any given time there are at least two, often three ambulances on the Peninsula. There are contractual requirements for
backup, response times etc. Also, ambulances move to different predetermined locations on the Peninsula to remain
centrally located when another ambulance is dispatched.
Every Fire Dept. person has a minimum of EMT training and there is a Paramedic on EVERY (Red) vehicle including
Engines and Trucks (Hook & Ladder). Their story is impressive and they take their "1't responder" responsibility very
seriously. Some might wonder why an "Engine" or Truck" company has been dispatched rather than a "Rescue" vehicle
and that is because the dispatched vehicle was closer and has the same trained personnel and can start medical
treatment sooner. Ambulances are secondary to the situation as the ambulance responsibility is to provide transport to
a hospital when the firemen so decide. The ambulance personnel are EMT trained and can initiate medical procedures
should they arrive before the Fire personnel.
In conclusion, where ambulances are stationed is a LA County Fire decision and what RPV should be concerned is not
ambulance arrival times but response times for LA County Fire personnel. My observations are that RPV residents are
very satisfied with the professionalism and responsiveness of the LA County Fire Department. Going forward, Fire
Station 53 is old and does not appear large enough for additional vehicles or personnel, so is there City land on PV Dr.
South that would accommodate a new and larger fire station? Perhaps LA County could be induced to build a new and
larger fire station if provided the land to do so.
Ken DeLong
, "5,-2,.�•
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rancho Palos Verdes City Council:
Al Sattler <alsattler@igc.org>
Monday, May 19, 2014 10:46 PM
CC
Rancho LPG Tank Facility
I strongly support the City Council putting on a future agenda a discussion of the Rancho LPG Tank Facility. This facility
has the potential to be a major disaster for those of us in the Eastview portion of Rancho Palos Verdes, as well as the
portions of San Pedro that are even closer to it.
I'm sorry that I probably will not be able to be present in person tomorrow night to speak to this issue.
Al Sattler
RPV
Ssa 01.
From:
April Sandell <hvybags@cox.net>
Sent:
Monday, May 19, 2014 9:59 PM
To:
CC
Cc:
chateau4us@att.net Lacombe; Janet Gunter
Subject:
Tomorrow's council meeting / Rancho LPG Tanks /city council consideration to place
this matter on a future agenda.
Dear Council members,
I cannot imagine a less than unanimous vote in favor to place this item on a future agenda. If, in fact, the council's final
determination finds no morally justifiable reason to be further concerned would be sad to say the least.
I urge your protection.
Sincerely,
April L. Sandell
S-5.?, ter.
From: Carl Southwell <carl.southwell@gmail.com>
Sent: , Tuesday, May 20, 201412:31 PM
To: CC
Cc: Kit Fox
Subject: Study Session report for City Council discussion of Rancho LPG facility on May 20th -
Late Correspondence
Dear Councilmembers:
Because of its adjacency to residential neighborhoods, the Rancho LPG Holdings, LLC butane storage facility
in San Pedro, California has been controversial since it was built in the early 1970s. From its conception, many
local residents have opposed its siting and have continued to voice concern about its operation.
I have studied this facility's siting, and my observations can be summarized as follows:
1. There is a significant difference in the risk management of planned versus existing hazardous
facilities. In Unbuilding Cities: Obduracy in Urban Sociotechnical Change, Hommels comments
extensively about the persistence of ill-conceived and unwanted infrastructure in urban
environments. Rancho LPG is an example of obduracy due to embeddedness. The persistency of
Rancho LPG is due, in part, to its relative rigidity and irreversibility with respect to zoning, legal
developments, and the "'deep-rooted [American] ideological antipathy to government intervention in
urban and regional developments"' (Hommels, p. 13).
2. From a policy perspective, it is a bad idea to exempt facilities from regulations without a sunset
clause. It is improbable that, if built from scratch, Rancho LPG would be licensed today at its current
location given current regulations and other requirements such as an EIS and a QRA. From a macro -
level perspective, the example of Rancho LPG highlights the absurdity of unlimited grandfathering in
zoning. The original rationale for grandfathering was that significant, sudden regulatory change hurts
existing facilities and discourages future investment. Arguments centering on "fairness" and "economic
feasibility" (e.g., it is less expensive to implement pollution controls at the time of new construction
rather than as a retrofit) were developed to favor the owners of infrastructure. In retrospect, however,
the obvious problems of grandfathering emerged. By creating a permanent, regulatory environment
favoring existing facilities, grandfathering established a perverse incentive to keep aging facilities
open. The grandfathered status of Rancho LPG may have become its most valuable asset. Protecting
that asset has meant defending the facility, even at the potential expense of downplaying public safety
and, in the case of its expired marine shipping permit, operating less efficiently. When an area's zoning
changes, whether it be economically positive zoning with respect to the property owner (i.e., for "war
emergency" purposes) or economically negative zoning with respect to the property owner (i.e., new
pollution regulations or the requirement of an EIR), the implementation of grandfathering, at least with
respect to public safety and environmental compliance issues, should either be eliminated or strictly
delimited in scope and time.
3. Siting of aboveground LPG storage facilities near other critical infrastructure or near population centers
should always be avoided and, when present, rectified. Alternative siting, hardening, and additional
security can be established as very effective tools in reducing both reducing expected losses. Siting of
aboveground LPG storage facilities in areas with low densities at least four miles from population
centers and at least two miles from other significant commercial enterprises to minimize the exposure of
people and property to potential harm should be strongly preferred in the regulatory approval process,
and full containment of facility tanks should be mandatory.
SSa d.
4. The persistency of Rancho LPG may also be due to its significant sunk costs. Political decisions often
consider sunk costs, and avoidance of this consideration can only be accomplished absolutely by use of
prospective analysis of proposed sites rather than retroactive analysis of existing sites.
I'd ask that, when the Council deliberates this (or any other) land use issues, please consider the following:
1. For decisions concerning facilities containing CBRN hazards, consider always using revocable CUPs
over zoning determinations or variance findings.
2. Avoid taking sunk costs into consideration with respect to all land use decisions.
3. Allow reasonable per speaker maximum times (perhaps, five minutes per speaker) for public comments.
Best regards,
Carl Southwell
2242 Estribo Drive
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
From: Kit Fox
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 3:37 PM
To: Teresa Takaoka
Subject: FW: Rancho Study Session
Attachments: Rancho - Worst Case - RPV Eastview.pptx
Late Correspondence for Item SS2d
Kit Fox, AICP
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
(310) 544-5226
kitf@rpv.com
-----Original Message -----
From: Ronald Conrow [mailto:Ronald.Conrow@plainsmidstream.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 3:31 PM
To: Kit Fox
Subject: Rancho Study Session
Kit,
Please have this PPT available for overhead projection view during tonight's RPV City Council meeting Study Session on
Rancho.
Regards,
Ron Conrow
This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This message, including any
attachments, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the
sender and delete this message and any attachments from your system.
Rancho Palos Verdes
(EasMew)
U yj
IT
X
eOr. -;n.
5 .-t — Rel—
From: Vogt, Justin <Justin.Vogt@mail.house.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:32 PM
To: CC
Subject: Letter in support
Attachments: 20140520 - RPV Support Letter.pdf
Please accept this letter in support of the resolution the RPV council will soon consider regarding Rancho LPG holding.
Justin Vogt I Legislative Director
Office of Congresswoman Janice Hahn (CA -44)
404 Cannon Building I Washington DC 20515
Tel: 202-225-8220 1 Fax: 202-226-7290
55-� Ct.
JANICE HAHN
ATM pl:'sTRIC;T, CALIFORNIA
,
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
G.8.tNra.7.C�U- PPM
f` • ,�
µ
404 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
SMALL BUSINESS
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
1202} 225-822b
RANKING MrmarH - HEALTH AND TrcHNOt.OGr
r� } �j�' },, #�
S.An
PORTS CAUCUS ongreo
,�y
of the a�� Web aLQ�
140 W. 6TI r Sr RErT
W6ni9 Si
FOUNDER AND CO-CHAIR
SAN PEDRO, CA 90731
(310)831—t7--
CROATIAN CAUCUS
QQtv)p7.0I OT.FI.G�<.
CO-CHAIa
Unbington, �C 20515-0544
205 S. WILLOWBROOK AvrN(.)E
COMPTON, CA 90220
H1-r'F gHAHN.HOUSr.GOV
May 20, 2014
(310)605-5520
.'...._."....
86510 CALIFORNIA Avr NUE
Members of the Rancho Palos Verdes Cit Council
y
Snural 323) CA -9262
(1323)553-955?.
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.,
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Dear Councilmembers:
1 write in support of the proposed resolution the RPV council will soon consider regarding
prompt and necessary action to preserve the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of Rancho
Palos Verdes related to the butane storage facility operated by Rancho LPG holding. It is
extremely important to the community of Rancho Palos Verdes that we promote an open.
discussion of the future of these facilities to keep the public educated. I have long fought for
safety of the citizens you represent as well as the ones I represent in San Pedro, and this
resolution will finally place us on the path to resolving this outstanding issue.
Just over one year ago, 1 spoke out in support of the EPA's decision to sue the owners of the
Rancho LPG Tanks for their repeated violations of federal law. This process of litigation
continues and I am committed to holding Rancho LPG fully accountable at the federal level.
However, the role of the RPV City Council is crucial to hold Rancho LPG accountable by all
local and state authorities.
Today the Rancho LPG facility is a potential safety hazard, but should we fail to act a hazard can
quickly escalate to a crisis. We have an opportunity and a responsibility to be proactive and
prevent a crisis occurring next to shops, homes, six soccer fields, and an elementary school..
Thank you for taking a stand today for the health of your residents. It is crucial that the Rancho
Palos Verdes City Council take the lead on this issue and approve a plan of action. The public
deserves a safe neighborhood and the right to be a part of the process. Please accept my support
for the resolution to preserve the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens and property owners
of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
From: So Kim
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 20141:08 PM
To: Teresa Takaoka
Cc: Carla Morreale
Subject: FW: 5656 Crest Rd., RPV - Case No. ZON2014-00055
Attachments: 5656 Crest Rd., RPV - Don Douthwright.pdf
Hi Teri,
Attached is late correspondence for the 5656 Crest item.
Sincerely,
So Kim
Associate Planner
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
w
(310) 544-52280�• `•/ sok@rpv.com
From: Tristan Harris <tharris@arborcapitalgroup.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 201412:26 PM
To: So Kim
Subject: 5656 Crest Rd., RPV - Case No. ZON2014-00055
Hi So,
Please see attached letter from Don Douthwright, President of the Island View HOA.
We have been working with Don throughout this process and getting feedback from his neighborhood through
him concerning the project. He also happens to live in one of the only two adjacent homes that abut to the
site.
Don will be at the meeting tonight and will speak about the process.
Thankyou
Tristan D. Harris
Associate
Arbor Capital Group, Inc.
4040 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 250
Newport Beach, CA 92660
tharris , arborcapitalgroup.com
The information contained in this message is absolutely confidential and may be legally privileged and protected from disclosure and is intended
only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this transmission is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to the sender and deleting it from your computer. Thank you.
0
5/20/2014
Don Douthwright
President, Island View HOA
37 Santa Barbara
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
So Kim
Associate Planner
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
RE: 5656 Crest Rd., Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 — Case No. ZON2014-00055
Dear So Kim:
I am writing to offer my support for the proposed project at 5656 Crest Rd., Rancho Palos
Verdes. My home is directly adjacent to the subject lot and I along with my neighbor to the
West, would be the most affected by any improvements to the site.
On 12/9/13 I was contacted via email by LMC Management Group to discuss the proposed
project and provide feedback. I agreed to host a preliminary meeting at my home with some of
the closest neighbors to the site on the evening of 12/18/13. Tomaro Design Group & LMC
Management Group presented their plan for the project to build two 2 -story homes at the site.
Our major concern was the idea of roof lines from the proposed homes obstructing the views
from our properties.
Following the meeting at my home, Tomaro and LMC offered to place up Silhouette Marker
Lines on the subject property to show the heights of the proposed homes. Our concerns were
validated and the markers showed the 2 -story height would be in our sightlines.
Tomaro and LMC then requested to hold another meeting to be open to the public and the
entire Island View Neighborhood on 1/20/14 at the Palos Verdes Public Library Community
Room. I sent out a letter to all of the members of the HOA informing them of the project and
inviting them to the meeting. Between 25-30 residents attended the meeting and Tomaro &
LMC presented an alternative plan proposing 1 -story homes only. This was accepted by all
residents in attendance and a vote was taken with all in favor.
After all of the discussion, I appreciate that Tomaro & LMC Management approached our
community to work with us and come to an agreement on a project suitable to the
D3
neighborhood before going to application. Throughout the process they have addressed our
major concerns and provided appropriate alternatives.
Sincerely,
Don Douthwright
President, Island View HOA
From: dena friedson <dlfriedson@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 7:59 PM
To: CC; Joel Rojas; Kit Fox; dlfriedson@gmail.com
Subject: Upper Point Vicente Parkland
To: Mayor Jerry Duhovic and City Council Members Jim Knight, Susan Brooks, Anthony Misetich, and Brian Campbell
and
To: Kit Fox and Joel Rojas
From: Dena Friedson
Re: Upper Point Vicente Farmland
As noted in the staff report, it is environmentally important to retain and maintain the healthy cacti crop that grows on
the Upper Point Vicente farmland even if the farm itself ceases to exist.
Perhaps it could be possible for the Peninsula Land Conservancy to establish a cacti and coastal sage nursery on the
acreage (which is part of the area subject to National Park Service regulations) and to manage the required care and
watering of the plants.
Trails could extend from the rest of the Alta Vista Nature Reserve into the previous farmland with signage in appropriate
places to describe the plants and the history of the property. At established times, members of the general public could
be guided by City or Conservancy experts that would explain the many -decades -long background of agriculture on the
Peninsula.
Since suggested alternate locations for a community garden all have serious problems, I hope the City Council will direct
the staff to keep searching for a suitable site so that commercial and non-commercial agriculture will be able to play a
continuing role in the history of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Thank you for your attention to this issue.
WE
From: Kit Fox
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 7:42 AM
To: Teresa Takaoka
Subject: FW: Location change of Hatano Ranch
Late Correspondence for Item 4
Kit Fox, AICP
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
(310) 544-5226
kitf@rpv.com
-----Original Message -----
From: martinezmartin64@yahoo.com[ma iIto: martinezmartin64@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 9:47 PM
To: Kit Fox
Subject: Location change of Hatano Ranch
Dear Kit Fox, AICP,
This is Martin Martinez, today I received the papers that let me know the city wants to change the ranch location
and I am fine with this if there are no other alternatives. What I wish could happen is that they would continue to charge
me rent for the current ranch even if the price is raised but if that's not possible I wish for more time than just until the
end of September. More time would be necessary for my to properly remove my tools, properly acclimate the new land
the city would allow me to use, and to correctly transfer plants like the cacti and some flowers that have already been
planted. What I would also like is if the city would at least allow me to continue to tend to the cacti that would remain at
the current ranch because they need to be tended and it would make me very happy. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Martin Martinez
PRESERVING LAND AND RESTORING HABITAT FOR THE EDUCATION AND ENJOYMENT OF ALL
May 20, 2014
Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Re: Agricultural Use at Alta Vicente Reserve
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers:
The May 20, 2014 staff report contemplates alternative uses of Alta Vicente Reserve because of concerns
that allowing the existing agricultural fields to lie fallow or untended might adversely impact the Palos Verdes
Nature Preserve (Preserve), to which this site belongs. We appreciate the consideration that allowing the
former farm site to become fallow would not be in the best interest of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.
Therefore, once the land is vacated, the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy would be pleased to
prioritize the restoration of this site and include educational and volunteer opportunities for the community
in this location.
PVPLC did not have plans to revegetate the site in the near future because we understood that the farm site
was in the hands of the Hatano Family and that they or Mr. Martinez would continue operating the site. If
the farm is removed, then this site would be an excellent candidate for habitat restoration as it is already part
of the Preserve.
Since the site is a part of the Preserve, any proposed use would need to be consistent with the Natural
Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) and the forthcoming conservation easement and include
consultation with the PVPLC. Given the high likelihood that a community garden would not be consistent
with these conservation plans and safeguards, the City might consider an alternate site if a community garden
is a City priority. The research done already by the City staff has identified City -owned lands that are
suitable for agriculture and this research suggests four alternative feasible locations.
Please don't hesitate to contact me at 310-541-7613 if I may provide any clarifications or additional
information.
Sincerely,
Andrea Vona
Executive Director
Cc: Kit Fox, Senior Administrative Analyst
Joel Rojas, Director of Community Development
916 SILVER SPUR ROAD # 207. ROLLING HILLS ESTATES. CA 90274-3826 T 310.541.7613 WWW.PVPLC.ORG
CITY OF
,. RANCHO PALOS
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: MAY 19, 2014
SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO
AGENDA
Attached -are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received
through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, May 20, 2014 City Council meeting:
Item No.
SS2 d
D
2
4
Respectfully submitted,
Carla Morreale
Description of Materials
Emails from: Carl Southwell; Adrianne Ferree
Emails from: Sunshine; Sherree and Russ Greenwood; Email
exchange between Staff and Shari Graner
Letter from Harriet Hart
Email from Sunshine
W:WGENDA\2014 Additions Revisions to agendas\20140520 additions revisions to agenda through Monday afternoon.doc
From: Kit Fox
Sent: Friday, May 16, 201410:06 AM
To: Teresa Takaoka
Subject: FW: Study Session report for City Council discussion of Rancho LPG facility on May 20th
Late Correspondence on Item SS2-d.
Kit Fox, AtcP
Citic of Rancho Palos Verdes
(310) 544-5226
kitf@Mv.com
From: Carl Southwell [mailto:carl.southwell@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 9:58 AM
To: Kit Fox
Cc: Carolynn Petru; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>
Subject: Re: Study Session report for City Council discussion of Rancho LPG facility on May 20th
Thank you for the notification.
However, your underlined sentence compels me to comment. Your city's ability to limit the public comment
period to one minute per speaker for oral comment is ridiculously low --in essence, transforming the concept of
social leveling to sound bites. Rousseau would be appalled.
Carl Southwell
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Kit Fox <KitF(a�rpv.com> wrote:
Dear Interested Party:
During its monthly Study Session at the meeting on Tuesday, May 201h, the City Council will be discussing
and considering a request by Councilman Brian Campbell to agendize a future "Regular Business" item
regarding the Rancho LPG facility in San Pedro. Councilman Campbell's May 20th report is available for
review on the City's website at the following link:
http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/citycouncil/agendas/2014 Agendas/MeetingDate-2014-05-
20/RPVCCA CC SS 2014 05 20 02d Rancho LPG Tank Facility.pdf
S Ste, d .
The City Council's Study Session meeting starts at 6:00 PM (an hour before the Regular Session at 7:00 PM)
at Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275. Please
note that, pursuant to Section 6.1 (f) of the City Council Rules of Procedure, oral public comment on Study
Session items may be limited to one (1) minute per speaker. However, you are welcome to submit written
comments via e-mail to cc e,rpv.com, which will be distributed to the City Council as "Late
Correspondence." The only action to be considered by the City Council on May 20th is whether or not to
agendize this matter as a "Regular Business" item on a future City Council agenda. In the event that this
matter is agendized for future City Council action, additional opportunities for oral and written public
comment will be available.
City Staff continues to monitor issues related to the Rancho LPG facility as a part of the regular bi-monthly
Border Issues Status Report to the City Council. The next Border Issues Status Report is scheduled for the
"Consent Calendar" at the City Council meeting of June P
Thank you very much for your interest in this matter.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior Administrative Analyst
Citic Managers Office
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd,
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
T: (310) 544.-5226
F. (310) 5445291
E kitf@rpv com
M,
y3
Carl Southwell
Contact me at (use whichever you prefer)
carl.southwell(a-).gmail.com
carl.southwelKD- riskandpolicy. org
Visit: www.Pressfriends.orq
Making writing fun for elementary school kids, empowering kids to become mentors and leaders, and creating friendships
among youth from diverse backgrounds.
From: Adrianne Ferree <abferree@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 4:22 PM
To: cc
Cc: Amanda Ferree; Lauren Ferree; alley ferree; Neil Ferree; Lacombe
Subject: Rancho LPG facility
I unfortunately wont be able to attend the council meeting tomorrow. However I want to express that my
whole family, 5 voting member of RPV, support the making the Rancho LPG facility in San Pedro a "Regular
Business" item on a future City Council agendas.
We live in the Rolling Hills Rivera Home Owners Association area are are about one mile from the tanks.
Adrianne Ferree
Ssa d.
From: SunshineRPV@aol.com
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 9:37 AM
To: CC; Carolynn Petru; Michael Throne
Cc: jeanlongacre@aol.com; pvpasofino@yahoo.com; amcdougalll@yahoo.com;
robert.laman@dslextreme.com; j1000@cox.net; russ@cheapvintage.com;
cmoneil@aol.com; momofyago@gmail.com
Subject: May 20, 2014 City Council Consent Calendar Item D. Sunnyside Segment
MEMO
FROM: SUNSHINE
TO: RPV City Council, Staff and interested parties
RE: May 20, 2014 City Council Consent Calendar Item D. Sunnyside Segment (of the Palos Verdes Loop
Trail, CTP A28, illustrated in the existing RPV General Plan as figure 22 on page 135. PV Loop Trail Project
Segment 18, PVP.Horsemens Assoc. Trail Guide, Sol Vista Trail connection to Sol Vista Park.)
Please move and approve this Item as recommended.
There is no point in discussing the specifics of the project any further until it is funded and the agreement with
the County is signed.
A "YES" vote means that a solution to the problem will to be investigated.
A "NO" vote means that this historic recreational trail and emergency circulation corridor will continue to be
maintained in a substandard fashion. Of the 100 Segments all around "The Hill" described by the PV Loop
Trail Project, this is the only "complete in 1985" Segment which has since been obstructed by a City Staffs
errors and omissions.
As bad as the dollar amount sounds, this grant is a valid way to restore safe and public off-road circulation.
D.
From: Russell Greenwood <beachjake@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 9:16 PM
To: cc
Subject: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Segment Improvement Project
We are in support and agreement with staff recommendations to proceed
with the Sunnyside Ridge Trail Segment Improvement Project and budget
adoption. This project will restore the trail that was freely traveled prior to
the construction and relocation of the trail which resulted in a damaged
trail . Drainage from the house resulted in the current horse trail being
damaged. This grant will restore the trail and encourage all to use a safe
trail.
Sherree Greenwood
Russ Greenwood
2543 Sunnyside Ridge Road
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
From:
Lauren Ramezani
Sent:
Monday, May 19, 2014 7:16 AM
To:
Carla Morreale
Cc:
Michael Throne; Teresa Takaoka
Subject:
FW: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report
Carla,
Please add this to the 5/20 cc Late Correspondence.
Tx.
Lauren Ramezani
Sr. Administrative Analyst- Public Works
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
310-544-5245
Laurenr@rpv.com
www.palosverdes.com/rpy
From: Lauren Ramezani
Sent: Friday, May 16, 201410:26 AM
To:'Shari Graner'
Cc: bill@lctex.com; Bob Laman
Subject: RE: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report
Shari,
I'm sorry to hear that. The city does care about its residents' concerns. I will forward your email and issues with safety
to our Sheriffs liaison for further assistance.
Thank you.
Lauren Ramezani
Sr. Administrative Analyst- Public Works
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
310-544-5245
Laurenr@rpv.com
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
From: Shari Graner [mailto:sharigraner@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 9:19 AM
To: Lauren Ramezani
Cc: bill Ictex.com; Bob Laman
Subject: Re: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report
Thank you for clarifying. As to light use, you were not here last summer when transients were entering our properties
from the canyon. Check w/Lomita Sheriff - they even had to send the chopper here. This trail will make it that much
easier. RPV seems determined to do this in spite of resident taxpayer concerns. I'm losing affection for my city.
Shari Graner
Sent from my iPhone
On May 16, 2014, at 9:11 AM, Lauren Ramezani <LaurenR@rpv.com> wrote:
Shari,
The answer to question #13 is similar to #14. This trail is not a trail head. Sor an increase in traffic is not
expected. You have a concern about safety as result of a trail development. However, we expect a light
use of the trail by people not living in the surrounding area.
11111"Ic1i1"
Lauren Ramezani
Sr. Administrative Analyst- Public Works
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
310-544-5245
Laurenr@rpv_.com
www.palo8verdes.com/rpv
From: shari graner [mailto:sharigraner@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 9:06 AM
To: Lauren Ramezani
Cc: bill@lctex.com; Bob Laman
Subject: Re: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report
Lauren,
I still do not see here - in all of these 80+ pages - where you address Sunnyside Community Association's
Item #13 issue over security issues by allowing transients easier access to burglarize our homes. All it
says is'See Below.' Nothing 'below' addresses this issue. Please advise.
Shari Graner
sharigraner@aol.com
Sent from my iPad
On May 16, 2014, at 8:33 AM, Lauren Ramezani <LaurenR@rpv.com> wrote:
Good morning,
Attached please find a link to the 5/20/14 City Council meeting staff report
regarding the Sunnyside Ridge Trail grant agreement and request for project
budget appropriation. The meeting starts at 7 p.m. at Hesse Park.
The staff report is 5 pages (4 page report plus a 1 page location map). However,
before you press "print" be advised that there are several lengthy attachments,
including a copy of the County grant agreement, a copy of the handout at the
Sunnyside Community Association meeting, and a summary of questions and
answers from that meeting. There is a total of 80+ pages.
http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/citycouncil/agendas/2014 Agendas/MeetingDa
e-2014-05-
20/RPVCCA CC SIR 2014 05 20 D Grant Approval Sunnyside Ridge Trail
lmprovement.pdf
If you have any questions regarding the staff report or the grant process, please
feel free to contact me.
Thanks.
Lauren Ramezani
Sr. Administrative Analyst- Public Works
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
310-544-5245
Laurenr@rpv.com
www.paIosverdes,com/rpv
jw
at
M44
06 -al4do PX�W, Ve,,Oe, C�� C&,)qb
From: SunshineRPV@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 9:21 PM
To: CC; Carolynn Petru
Subject: May 20, 2014 Council Agenda Item 4 Update regarding agricultural use at
MEMO
FROM: SUNSHINE
TO: RPV City Council, Staff and interested parties
RE: May 20, 2014 Council Agenda Item 4 Update regarding agricultural use at
Point Vicente Park.
I am so disappointed. For a second time in almost 10 years, Staff has convinced the City Council to "chicken
out" on lobbying our Federal government. The deed restrictions on Point Vicente Park are no longer needed to
save "passive recreation" in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. What we need is educational agriculture and
active recreation facilities. Why have we no one who can present our case?
Subject: Update regarding Agricultural Use at Point Vicente Park
Date: 5/16/2014 8:56:37 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time
From: KitF r vp com
To: KitFn�v.com
CC: Carol, nn pxpv.com, Coryl., g,rpv.com, JoelR@.rpv.com, AraM@Ipv.com, TeriT@rpv.com
Dear Interested Party:
On May 20th, the City Council will receive a status report on the existing agricultural use at Point Vicente
Park. The Staff report has been posted on the City's website at the following link:
http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/citycouncil/agendas/2014 A eg_ndas/Meeting_Date-2014-05-
20/RPVCCA CC SR 2014 05 20 04 Agricultural Use Pt Vicente Park.pdf
The City Council meets at 7:00 PM at Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Blvd., Rancho Palos
Verdes, CA 90275.
Thank you for your interest in this issue.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICD
Senior Administrative Analyst
City Manager's Office
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
T: (310) 544-5226
F: (310) 544-5291
E: kitf@Kpv.com